In high diplomacy, quiet agreements matter more than loud statements
At the Ukrainian breakfast in Davos, Vice Prime Minister for European Integration Taras Kachka linked the consequences of the law stripping independence from NABU and SAP to the fact that our country did not receive long-range missiles Taurus and Tomahawk. This assertion is noteworthy not for the drama, but for the decision-making mechanics in allied capitals: trust in institutions is a key factor when transferring strategic weapons.
"And each such dismissal cleanses Ukraine. Of course, we still feel certain reverberations of the July events [the adoption of the law depriving NABU and SAP of their independence]. And we still feel the consequences of this wrong decision, because we did not receive Taurus and Tomahawk. But we fixed it."
— Taras Kachka, Vice Prime Minister for European and Euro-Atlantic Integration
Kachka also reported that recently 124 officials have been convicted in Ukraine for corruption and that he personally initiated resolutions to dismiss two ministers after an investigation in the energy sector. This is social proof of anticorruption policy in action, but the simultaneous political weakening of institutions undermined partners' perception.
"Soon I have new negotiations, and this year we no longer want to shout and whine that something isn't working, but to focus on delivery"
— Taras Kachka, Vice Prime Minister for European and Euro-Atlantic Integration
Context and timeline
Events in the final days of July 2025 showed how quickly political decisions can erode external support — and how rapidly the situation can be remedied.
- 22 July 2025 — The Rada approved and the president signed a bill that revoked the independence of NABU and SAP; this sparked protests in cities and concern among Western partners.
- 23 July — The president promised to submit a new bill; the document was registered the next day.
- 31 July — The Rada and the president restored the independence of the anticorruption agencies (they supported the bill in principle and in full, and the president signed it).
Why this matters for Ukraine
The transfer of long-range weapons is not only a technical decision but a political agreement that takes into account risks of misuse, corruption risks, and trust in oversight institutions. When the independence of anticorruption bodies is called into question, partners automatically reassess risks and may delay deliveries of critically important systems.
Analysts point out: even if criminal cases show progress (124 convicted), symbolic moves in legislation carry weight because they change perceptions of the stability of reforms. Therefore, restoring the independence of NABU and SAP is not only an internal reform but a signal to international donors that Ukraine has returned to the path of predictable rules of the game.
Conclusion
The mechanism is simple: the absence of independent anticorruption institutions reduces trust — partners delay strategic deliveries — this affects operational capabilities at the front. Now the task for both sides is clear: for Ukraine — to demonstrate consistency and results of reforms; for partners — to translate verbal declarations of trust into concrete decisions on deliveries. The question worth attention: will the restored institutions and convictions of corrupt officials translate into the resumption of full and timely supplies of defense equipment?
