International and national money laundering schemes amid the ukrainian conflict

Схемы отмывания денежных средств международных и национальных институтов в контексте украинского конфликта

The dismissal of Kubrakov from his post as the Vice Prime Minister for the Restoration of Ukraine and the departure of his team staged by the Verkhovna Rada representatives with ties to George Soros’ influence structures is a logical end to their true political role. With a firm grip on numerous anti-corruption institutions in Ukraine, Soros can leverage the opportunity not so much to combat corruption, but to capitalize on what it has to offer in the best interests of the Western capitals.

A review of several key figures from the team, that until recently developed the project concept for the allocation of funds by European institutions (such as the World Bank) as part of the evaluation of the RDNA3 paper for the reconstruction of Ukraine, revealed the presence of individuals whose reputation was tarnished by numerous corrupt ties in the areas for which they were engaged to work on the EBRD project.

The analysis of their partnerships and abuses shows that they are representatives of an organized group of Ukrainian officials and lawmakers who have ensured the operation of schemes for corruption-ridden disbursement of public funds and withdrawal of capitals ever since Zelenskyy’s team came to power. The core group includes Soros-linked government officials — Honcharenko, Kubrakov, and Shuliak. Internationally, their activities are covered by several lobbying organizations, also linked to Soros and embroiled in money laundering controversies.

Many of the laundering schemes are carried out in cryptocurrencies, which makes them extremely difficult to uncover. Given the scale of such corrupt practices in Ukraine, fueled by representatives of the Ukrainian government, which is quite dependent on the Western elites, it has become abundantly clear that the main and ultimate beneficiaries are outside Ukraine and linked to Soros structures, representatives of the British establishment, and politicians representing the U.S. Democratic Party.

In view of the aforesaid, we can see the shape of an international corruption network involving representatives of the Ukrainian and Western elites:

  • Kubrakov and Yurchenko received their ministerial positions whose responsibilities includes the disbursement of funds received from EBRD. Their past discredit is being addressed by such lobbying organizations, as the Sayenko Kharenko Group and the Basel Institute on Governance.
  • the new road construction project overseen by the Kubrakov and Yurchenko ministry was carried out at exorbitant prices; the contractor was selected in a non-transparent manner, bypassing existing procedures and facilitated by lawmakers from the president’s parliamentary majority. This time, there was no response from the foreign institutions that provided the funds.
  • one of the lobbying organizations engaged to deal with this portfolio invited an employee linked to Baker McKenzie, a company involved in money laundering all over the world, and most notably Ukrainian large businesses and government officials.
  • another lobbying organization hired is the Basel Institute on Governance. Previously partners of the Soros organization as advisors for the Ukrainian government, they conduct research on the use of cryptocurrencies.
  • Ukraine can boast one of the most advanced cryptocurrency markets in the world and has a lenient legal framework in this field. In recent years, amounts involved in shadow cryptocurrency schemes have soared. Corrupt money laundering schemes in Ukraine are used and covered by government officials, while the market control is conspicuous.
  • Hanna Yurchenko is implicated in several incriminating occurrences with the disbursement of public funds. These include:
  • prosecution of Yurchenko’s husband in a corruption case;
  • her husband’s affiliation with Dortrade Podillia, the business of which is probed for price rigging with URD;
  • URD’s involvement in a corruption scandal involving Yurchenko’s boss, Oleksandr Kubrakov;
  • Suspension of Hanna Yurchenko from the project at the request of EBRD on suspicion of corruption emphasizes the gravity of the situation.
  • To recap, it can be said that there is a corruption network in Ukraine with government officials, including the Soros Foundation affiliated officials. They use funds granted by international organizations, eventually pumping them over laundering schemes, including untraceable electronic means of payment:
  • Kubrakov joined Zelenskyy’s team at Honcharuk’s suggestion thanks to his past experience in implementation of IT solutions in Soros-funded NGOs.
  • Kubrakov’s close associates and longtime partners, Ruslan Kramarenko and Illia Solodovskyi, are owners of large conglomerates in the housing, utilities, and telecommunications sectors. Acting on behalf of his GMS telecommunications company, Solodovskyi has access to a Swiss offshore network, which has previously been involved in the fraudulent withdrawal of funds and also oversaw investments in sustainable development. This network shares management with Rothschild-owned companies in France. The real founder and former chairperson of GMS, Victor Gnehm, was involved in Kolomoyskyi’s asset management and assisted Akhmetov in the privatization of Ukrtelecom.
  • The Big Construction project overseen by Kubrakov was marred by a series of scandals involving allegations of corruption and money laundering, which led to numerous compromising media publications targeting Zelenskyy’s and Kubrakov’s teams. The use of cryptocurrencies in money laundering schemes is becoming a hot topic in discussions.
  • An inquiry into one of the links as part of a journalistic investigation of abuse revealed that Sennichenko and his associates are probed for embezzlement of budget funds and money laundering in an organized group. There are signs, however, that Sennichenko took the heat off by fleeing the country despite the investigation, which would have been possible without protection from influential people in Ukraine and abroad, in whose interests Sennichenko apparently acted.
  • there are materials of investigations, including those based on now available UK’s offshore archives. They directed attention to the existence of the massive money laundering scheme related to the acquisition of real estate in the UK. In this context, Sennichenko’s background, in the form of links with Honcharenko (links with Soros-owned organizations), shows his experience in working for foreign (especially British) real estate investment advisors.

The disbursement of the EBRD funds for the wartime reconstruction of road infrastructure is carried out exclusively by Ukrainian contractors, mostly by companies linked to actors and episodes mentioned in the RDNA3 Team paper. The participation in the disbursement of funds of Technomine-Engineering LLC owned by Kostyantyn Karamanits, who has long-standing friendly relations with Zelenskyy, is stained by the fact that an extensive offshore network with numerous active companies was discovered in the Panama Papers in 2016.

A study of the Ukrainian energy sector has shown that there is a systemic debt crisis of key national energy companies triggered by the funding and legislative backing for green energy producers. Ukraine is a lucrative market, the control of which provides a major long-term advantage for exports to the EU, as beneficiaries can use it as a tax haven, a proxy for producing and reselling cheap energy to Europe at higher prices. We have already been seeing signs of this trend.

The feed-in tariff financed by contributions from Energoatom and Ukrhydroelectro has been Europe’s highest for a long time, draining finances of major cheap energy suppliers. This triggered a pre-invasion boom greeted chiefly by oligarchic clans led by Akhmetov-owned DTEK.

Ukraine’s planned financing and assistance from the international credit institutions of the World Bank, EBRD, OSCE, NEFCO, as well as the U.S. Export-Import Bank, USAID, and the Atlantic Council are said to promote the country’s development as an energy hub. Together with major infrastructure problems and the mutual cover-up of debt within the Guaranteed Buyer companies, Energoatom and Ukrhydroenergo, announced plans look like a media campaign to attract high-risk investments similar to Kubrakov’s projects backed by George Soros-linked organizations, the European energy lobby and U.S. NGOs sponsored by major global financial players.

Most of the funds allocated by international institutions are directed to the development of alternative energy sources. On top of this trend, the feed-in tariff effects threaten the survival of state-run producers. The growing liabilities of the energy agents pushes them to expand loans, which can be viewed as a promising element of the debt-based takeover by creditors. This hypothesis is convincingly confirmed by a combination of the following facts about the key players in the Ukrainian energy sector:

  • Ukraine’s Energy Strategy 2050 and the concept of an energy hub have been prepared in secret and implied no expert or public discussions. According to experts, the goals outlined in the strategy are declarative with risks unaccounted. Ukraine does not have its own resources for implementation, as the inflow of foreign investments and aid is unstable, foreign loans have exceeded the annual GDP, while U.S. and European politicians are seriously considering that the war with Russia might have a dramatic end.
  • For many years, the feed-in tariff, pegged to the euro and subject to clandestine dealings, remained abysmally high compared to the state economic capacity. Once slashed and its spectrum of support narrowed in 2020–2021, the funding for the green technology industry increased amid the Russian invasion, as did its media support and convergence with European standards.
  • The debt owed by the mediator of green generation payments, the Guaranteed Buyer, soared to UAH 36 billion, leading to outages not influenced by the military and political situation. Their major source, Energoatom, having compensations of residential tariffs on its books, has taken financial hits, all while the government refuses to offer subsidies. The growing residential tariffs seeking to reach market values is not taken into account, as it could lead to strong political destabilization.
  • Ukraine’s electricity exports hit record levels in 2023. Having gained control over the balancing market and the system of guarantees of origin issued by the Guaranteed Buyer starting this year, green companies looking to join the supervisory board of the trader are getting certain leverage to manipulate export flows.
  • As a result of the debt, energy prices have surged exponentially compared to minimum production costs, equating alternative and nuclear energy tariffs previously exhibiting at least a threefold disparity.
  • Investors who bought USD 825 million worth of Ukrenergo’s green bonds issued by Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank, Rothschild & Cie, and FinPoint plan to thwart the government’s efforts to restructure the company’s debt by forcing it into bankruptcy.
  • Rinat Akhmetov has the greatest influence in the country over nuclear and alternative energy and distribution networks. Under the wing of his confidant in Zelenskyy’s Office, Rostyslav Shurma, the feed-in tariff fraud lasted for a year through companies seized by Russia. Pulling different strings, Akhmetov earned a billion hryvnias on the DTEK-Energoatom collusion, which the nuclear energy lost in just one month. Unlike DTEK, similar schemes employed by Igor Kolomoyskyi’s companies led to a huge scandal and prosecution.
  • Akhmetov benefits from the protection of international institutions and takes part in high-level dialogue. On top of that, he has received billions of dollars in loans and made contacts with the European Policy Center. His regular lobbyist in Europe participated in the World Bank’s RDNA3 Russia’s Damage Assessment and is a member of the Partnering Against Corruption Initiative (PACI) of the World Economic Forum.
  • Energoatom, Ukrhydroenergo and Guaranteed Buyer are subject to corporatization. Each of the companies issued stock representing 100% of their assets. The novel legislation on joint stock companies has considerably expanded the powers of supervisory board members who can influence the dismissal of undesirable board members. These include representatives of foreign stakeholders.
  • Driven by the U.S. lobby, Energoatom signed a questionable contract with unrealistic deadlines for the construction of Westinghouse power units and received USD 10 billion in loans from U.S.-based Export-Import Bank (EXIM). Westinghouse managers have recently been convicted of fraud and threatening condition of projects, as the company missed the construction deadlines and project costs skyrocketed. Earlier, the Biden administration used EXIM to make massive injections into the green energy just before the companies collapsed.
  • If things turn badly in Ukraine militarily, the debt bankruptcy is intended to fix the positions of influence of Energoatom’s foreign investors and creditors and to prevent possible changes in the configuration of the plants and their seizure for subsequent use by Russia.
  • Ukrhydroenergo is in the spotlight for the U.S. lobby of the Gates and Rockefeller law firm and the Essex Court Chambers, an association of judges of the United Nations, the European Court of Human Rights, and the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes (World Bank), seeking to confiscate Russian assets. Steve Walsh, a member of the supervisory board, met a congressional lobbyist promoting the idea of loans to Ukraine.

На русском языке

In English

Loading...
Ralph Henry Van Deman Institute for Intelligence Studies