One of the issues that emerged from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, observed with some amazement through analysts, is the relative ineffectiveness of the Russian armed forces vis-à-vis those of Ukraine. On paper, Russia has much larger and supplied armed forces. . Before the invasion, many analysts had speculated that in the event of a confrontation between Russia and Ukraine, the result would be a quick and complete victory for Russia. As the war progresses in its fifth month and Russia has been forced to move from an attack in Kiev to an offensive in Donbass, it is clear that this planned Russian victory has not materialized.
While there is much to be said about the tenacity and heroism of the Ukrainian defenders, the national spirit and determination of President Zelensky, and the effectiveness of some of the Western allies, it is evident that the Russian armed forces have not behaved as well as esperado. de them. One prospective thing that would possibly have contributed to the poor functionality is the challenge of corruption within the Russian armed forces. Historically, there has been a steady flow of senior military officials who have been called up for corruption, and some reports imply that corruption in the Russian military is endemic and a component of accepted culture.
As far as Ukraine is concerned, this would possibly have had a tangible effect on the Russian invasion. During the first weeks of the war, it became clear that Russia was suffering from logistical problems due, in part, to stuck vehicles. These disorders slowed the Russian advance and allowed Ukraine to target the affected columns and better prepare its defenses. OSINT said one possible explanation for this was the tires used in those cars. Images and photographs showed cars that couldn’t move because their tires disintegrated, jamming the vehicle and blocking roads. Some OSINT analysts have reported that this was because Russian procurement officials bought reasonable Tires made in China and pocketed the excess funds. Others speculated that maintenance managers simply stole the budget allocated for tire maintenance, such as normal tire cleaning and rolling. Although those arguments are not verified, if true, they would prove that historical Russian corruption has had a ripple effect with a tangible impact on the war in Ukraine today.
The corruption of the Russian army can be understood on 3 levels: individual, cultural and political. At the individual level, it can be argued that due to institutional and political aspects, Russian officials face a dynamic that encourages acts of corruption. The prospect of nonpublic profit and gain is large, while the perceived threat of being caught and punished is relatively low. This paradigm only intensifies with rank, as more senior officials have access to and control of larger funds, while also giving them some cover due to institutional and political issues discussed below. Corruption in the Russian military can also be caused by the collective culture within the institutions of the Russian military. There appears to be a culture of dissatisfaction and grievance within the officer corps dating back to the fall of the Soviet Union, where it is sometimes accepted that officers are underpaid and that other political elites and enterprises have been allowed to amass a large wealth while languishing. in relative poverty. In this culture, corruption, thought of as illegal, is perceived as an absolutely ethical and mandatory act to deal with post-USSR economic conditions. There is a belief, which is not unfounded, that political elites and oligarchs act corruptly by not properly distributing government resources and therefore officials will also have to interact with corruption to compensate for this matrix. .
On the political point, corruption in the Russian military is used to some extent as an approach to extend political control over top officials in the armed forces. Because corruption is so prevalent among top Russian officials, the risk of selectively exposing Americans who stray from the line gives Putin a point of control over the military as a whole. For this reason, it can be argued that to some extent corruption is allowed because it will build the centralized strength of the Kremlin. In addition, for this dynamic to be effective, it is essential that the Kremlin also have control over the establishments that will investigate corruption cases; the Public Ministry and the Chamber of Accounts. While the point of independence of those establishments has fluctuated in the post-Soviet years, since Putin’s consolidation of strength, both have increasingly come under Kremlin domination. The outgoing leader of the army prosecutors noted how subservient the army prosecutor’s workplace is to the Kremlin. In 2000, the outgoing Chief Military Prosecutor called the post “a requisition workplace for the Kremlin. ” Historically, even officials who are guilty of bribery will get mild consequences that ultimately amount to a return of a portion of the budget and a de facto ban on further promotion. All these points combine to create an incentive and a culture that accepts corruption, which, while in peacetime it may strengthen the political strength of Putin and the Kremlin, in wartime it has been shown to undermine the effectiveness of the fight. on a giant scale.