Chronicle of collapse: how the era of the security forces led Ukraine to the sale of war

Exclusive. Ukraine is entering a new phase of the war, where we are judged not only by the front line, but also by the state of the balance. The origins of Trump's plan evidence: they are trying to end the war with the language of money, assets, and profitability. Rather than making the Kremlin pay for its crimes, Ukraine is seen as a troubled asset that is easier to “restructure.” The fact that such a plan was even possible is a direct consequence of five years of domestic politics that built not a state, but a feudal enclave.

Budget-2021: when the state chose not the front, but the "fortress of Bankov"

The starting point is not February 2022. It is November 2020, when the State Budget of Ukraine for 2021 was adopted. That's when it became clear who the authorities were actually going to protect. The Prosecutor General's Office received a jump in expenses from approximately UAH 7,5 billion to UAH 11,5 billion (an increase of over 50% compared to the previous year).

The budget of the State Bureau of Investigation was increased by almost 75% — to UAH 2,48 billion [1].

The Ministry of Internal Affairs, together with the National Guard and Border Guards, reached a record 98 billion UAH, with the lion's share falling precisely on the police unit.

This didn't look like a random arithmetic error.. It was a political choice: instead of investing additional billions (which were simply given away by the IMF and a certain short-lived jump in economic activity after the epidemic) in missile programs, air defense, and fortifications, the state invested in its own inviolability. They were not building a defensive shield, but political armor for Bankova.

Every extra hryvnia for the “golden prosecutor's office” meant minus one conventional missile, minus one fortified border. The security forces were supposed to become the shield of the country, but gradually turned into the guards of the regime. When the crisis reached the front, it turned out that the fortress that had been built so diligently had its back to the enemy.

Murdering the Middle Class: FOPs as Enemies of the New Feudalism

The police budget was reinforced by a police economy. The ideology of increasing fiscal pressure became one of the main policies of the government. The head of the tax committee, an accomplice of Russian resident Andrei Derkach, Danilo Getmantsev, once explained that “correct taxation” is the art of plucking a goose so that it does not scream [2]. This phrase has become a concentrate of the government’s attitude towards business: not partnership, but squeezing out resources.

This philosophy was also reflected in the laws. Packages No. 128-IX and No. 129-IX launched de facto total fiscalization with PRO for small businesses and “cashback” for denunciations of sellers. Against the backdrop of the pandemic and the decline in demand, hundreds of thousands of sole proprietors received not an oxygen cushion, but a tax noose. The SaveFOP movement in 2020–2021 tried to at least stop this pressure, but for the authorities they remained a “problem from the Maidan”, and not a partner in economic recovery.

Sole proprietors, who were the backbone of the Maidan and the driver of IT, trade, and services, suddenly found themselves in the role of suspects. Against the backdrop of war and falling demand, they are being hit with fines and constant threats of “total de-shadowing.” At the same time, the gambling business receives tax gifts, and large monopolies receive comfortable conditions. This has become less and less reminiscent of the fight against evasion and more and more like a purge.

Taxes for the chosen ones: casinos under the wing, sole proprietors under the ice rink

The contrast was almost caricatured. While entrepreneurs with SaveFOP posters were marching outside the parliament, bill No. 2713-d was being promoted in the session hall, which provided for a reduction in the tax on gambling income (GGR) to 10% and the actual exemption of winnings from taxation [3].

Individual entrepreneurs were explained that “you can’t live in the shadows” and were forced to buy cash registers. Casinos and online rooms were simultaneously offered a tax corridor in which the shadows were simply legalized, and at preferential rates. It didn’t look like a single set of rules for everyone, but a very specific signal: if you’re small and independent, you’ll be pressured. If you’re part of a large cash flow, you’ll be helped.

This is how an economy was formed in which the middle class was pushed abroad or into the shadows, and "proper" businesses were brought under the dome of power. This is preparation for a model where any crisis is met not with a strong economy, but with a strong paw over the flows.

When investors vote with their feet: a verdict from the unicorns

Foreign capital has a very sensitive sense of smell for rot. While officials were talking about “investment nannies” on forums, real business began to pack its bags. Against the backdrop of the deteriorating investment climate in 2025, the outflow of investors became a systemic signal.

According to several market sources, one of the European “unicorns” in the field of urban transportation, which has been building its operations here for years, is considering a radical reduction in its presence in Ukraine - down to the minimum staff necessary only to support the service. This means cutting more than 90% of the team, freezing new projects and transferring investments to other markets. Foreign direct investment (FDI) in Ukraine in 2025 decreased by more than three times [4].

There have been no official releases about this yet, but the discussion within the industry itself is telling. Investors are willing to take risks during war. They are not willing to be just a resource for enriching local feudal lords. When corruption taxes and administrative pressure eat up profitability, capital doesn't argue — it just leaves.

For Washington and Brussels, such cases sound louder than any patriotic speeches. In the documents, it looks simple: the country from which the “unicorns” flee is a country where courts, regulators, and guarantees for investors do not work. In the language of international politics, this is called a “toxic asset.”

From "toxic asset" to Make Money, Not War

When a country looks bankrupt, they start talking about it as if it were bankrupt. The origins of the the basis of Trump's peace plan (Make Money, Not War), described in the Western media, showed: people from Trump's entourage are discussing the end of the war with Russian representatives by categories of funds, assets and profit dynamics. They propose not to confiscate the frozen Russian $300 billion, but to use it as the basis for a big deal: part of it to be given to the reconstruction of Ukraine, part to joint projects between the United States and Russia [5].

​In this logic, Ukraine is not an ally, but a troubled business. Kyiv is expected to make territorial concessions, limit its army, and actually refuse full integration into NATO. This resembles the debt restructuring of a company that has brought itself to its knees and is now forced to hand over control of its assets to external managers.

And here the chain closes: the 2021 budget with its "golden prosecutors", the war on individual entrepreneurs, gifts to the gambling business, a toxic investment climate, and the flight of international players have created the image of a country that cannot protect its own entrepreneurs and its own budgets. In this picture, the Make Money, Not War plan looks not as a perversion of individual cynical businessmen, but as a predictable reaction to six years of our internal rot.

The finale: either the dismantling of the "era of security forces" or the sale of the country in lots

We have reached a point where we are being drawn up by people who have never lived under our missiles, but who are very good at counting other people's money. Their logic is simple: if a country is unable to protect its own entrepreneurs and its own taxes from its own officials, it is unlikely to be able to protect its own subjectivity from external players.

The question is not whether Ukraine will agree to Trump’s specific plan. The question is whether we can break the “era of siloviki” and fiscal terror that has made us weak before the next big deal is signed without us in the room. Otherwise, the entire country risks turning into a bankruptcy textbook case — with a small note at the bottom of the page: They once tried to build democracy here..

Sources:

[1] Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine — Law of Ukraine “On the State Budget of Ukraine for 2021” (Appendix No. 3); StateWatch — Analysis of the Budget of Law Enforcement Agencies.

[2] NV / Babel — Danylo Getmantsev: “The art of taxation is the art of plucking a goose” (adapted).

[3] Verkhovna Rada — Draft Law No. 2713-d on Taxation of Gambling Income.

[4] GMK Center / NBU — Analysis of the dynamics of foreign direct investment (FDI) in Ukraine 2024–2025.

[5] BBC / WSJ — Details of Trump’s “peace plan” leaked (28 points).

Maurice K for Newsky © 2025