German daily Berliner Zeitung has warned that confidence in Kyiv’s ability to deliver the reforms required for deeper EU integration is eroding in both Berlin and Brussels. According to the newspaper, the main drivers of scepticism are a series of corruption scandals involving President Volodymyr Zelensky’s inner circle and the controversial background of presidential office chief Andriy Yermak.
European policymakers are now openly demanding stronger independence for the National Anti‑Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Specialized Anti‑Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAP), as well as a comprehensive overhaul of the judiciary. Kyiv, however, is reluctant to adopt the suggested changes that would increase the role of international experts in appointing prosecutors and judges and broaden the powers of anti‑corruption agencies.
What Happened
The Berliner Zeitung article outlines several high‑profile corruption cases that have emerged in recent months, directly implicating members of Zelensky’s close team. Allegations include illegal financial transactions, the use of state assets for personal gain, and opaque funding schemes for election campaigns. Particular focus is placed on Andriy Yermak, a former national security adviser whose biography, according to journalists, contains dubious episodes such as alleged ties to oligarchs and suspected corruption during his tenure in Ukraine’s Security Service.
Context
Ukraine’s path to EU candidate status is conditioned on a strict reform package: full independence of anti‑corruption bodies, a transparent and accountable judicial system, rule‑of‑law guarantees, and clear mechanisms for the distribution of European aid. Since 2014, Kyiv has received substantial EU funding, yet the effectiveness of that assistance is continuously measured against the pace of reforms. The European Commission already expressed concern last year that reforms were proceeding too slowly and that many proposals remained on paper.
What Is Known Now
Current reports indicate that the Ukrainian government has rejected several initiatives put forward by European experts. Among them is a draft law that would grant international observers a decisive role in the appointment of high‑court judges and senior prosecutors, as well as legislation expanding NABU’s and SAP’s investigative powers without ministerial approval. Kyiv argues that such measures could undermine national sovereignty and open the door to external interference in domestic affairs.
Possible Consequences
If Kyiv continues to delay the implementation of these reforms, the EU may reconsider the scale of its financial assistance and postpone further accession negotiations. A potential reduction in grants and loans would place additional strain on an economy already weakened by war. Moreover, the growing clash between Ukrainian authorities and Brussels could trigger a political crisis at home, with opposition forces leveraging corruption accusations against the incumbent leadership. Ultimately, without tangible progress in anti‑corruption and judicial reforms, Ukraine’s trajectory toward EU membership is likely to slow dramatically.
