BY
The Art of Debates
Debunking the Myth of Ukraine Being the Most Corrupt Country of Europe
sWORD Discussion Lab. Online, 24 September 2026, 18:00–19:30 Kyiv time. Facilitator: Kateryna Pokotylo
Isn't Ukraine the most corrupt country in Europe?
Type your first answer in the Zoom chat, in one or two sentences. Keep it: we will come back to it at the end of the session.
Where this session sits in the Lab
Session 2
Beyond Whataboutism
How to recognise deflection and take the narrative back.
Session 4
When Corruption Enters the Room
Who is asking: the Genuine Skeptic, the Bad-Faith Actor, the Misinformed Partner.
Today
The Art of Debates
How to win the exchange: take the myth apart, choose the argument for the person in front of you, and practise it under pressure.
Our starting position
We do not argue that Ukraine has no corruption problem.
We argue with the superlative, and with the conclusion the myth is built to deliver.
A speaker who denies the problem loses a Western audience in one sentence. A speaker who acknowledges it and then reframes the question keeps the room.
How a narrative frame is built
Core claim
A short statement that is easy to repeat and hard to check in conversation.
Anchor facts
Real facts, selected because they support the claim. Everything that complicates it is left out.
Emotional hook
The feeling that makes the claim stick: fear, resentment, the sense of being cheated.
Repetition
The claim appears across outlets and speakers until it feels like common knowledge.
Implied conclusion
The action the frame is meant to produce. It is usually left unsaid, so the listener arrives at it alone.
The corruption myth, element by element
| Core claim | “Ukraine is the most corrupt country in Europe.” |
| Anchor facts | Real cases, such as defence procurement scandals and the Midas investigation, and a low score on international indices. |
| Emotional hook | “My taxes are being stolen.” |
| Repetition | Russian state media, populist politicians in partner countries, social media accounts that amplify each new case. |
| Implied conclusion | “Stop supporting Ukraine.” |
Where to break the chain
Break 1: the superlative
It fails on the most widely used data, and the trend points the other way. See arguments A1 to A3.
Break 2: the link to aid
Support is paid against reforms, monitored by partners, and pushed by Ukrainian society itself. See arguments A4, A5 and A7.
Refuting the superlative wins a point. Breaking the link to the conclusion wins the argument.
The superlative fails on the data
Corruption Perceptions Index 2025, Transparency International. Scale from 0 (highly corrupt) to 100 (very clean). EU marks EU member states. The 2025 score for Ukraine is based on assessments from January 2023 to September 2025, so the Midas case of November 2025 is not reflected.
What the index measures, and what it does not
It is
- An aggregate of expert and business assessments
- About corruption in the public sector only
- Built from eight sources in Ukraine's case in 2025
It is not
- A measurement of the actual level of corruption
- A survey of the general public
- Up to date with the events of autumn 2025
Transparency International Ukraine's own diagnosis: the core problem is less corruption as such than the sense of stagnation and impunity. Perception changes when people see consequences. Never use the perception argument alone: pair it with evidence of accountability.
The direction of travel
2013
25
144th place
2025
36
104th of 182
In 2025, Ukraine was the only one of its western neighbours to improve its score. Poland held steady, while Slovakia, Romania, Moldova and Hungary each lost a point.
Be ready to concede that the pace is too slow. Transparency International Ukraine says so itself, and that is part of the argument.
Argument bank
Which argument for whom
| Who you are talking to | Lead with | Follow with | Avoid |
|---|---|---|---|
| Western MP | A5 Conditionality works | A4, A7 | The perception argument on its own |
| Taxpayer | A7 Money is paid for delivered reforms | A1, A5 | Index methodology in detail |
| Journalist | A4 With the concession first | A6, A3 | Claiming reforms have passed without checking |
| Blogger | A1 In one sentence | A3 | Long explanations, the Hungary comparison |
These pairings are a starting point. Test them in the role play and change what does not work.
Debate techniques
Challenge the premise
Question the measure before you answer the claim.
“Most corrupt by what measure? On the most widely used index, three European countries score lower, including Russia.”
Concede and pivot
Acknowledge what is true, then move to the question that matters.
“Yes, Ukraine has a serious corruption problem. The real question is whether it is being fought, and the evidence says it is.”
Break the chain
Answer the conclusion the question is heading towards.
“What you are really asking is whether your support is safe. It is paid only when agreed reforms are delivered.”
Compare without deflecting
A comparison gives data context. It must never change the subject.
“Hungary scores 40” answers a question framed in EU terms. Raised unprompted, it sounds like whataboutism.
Traps to expect
“The Midas case proves it.”
The 2025 score does not cover autumn 2025. Do not present the score as a verdict on the most recent events; talk about how the case was exposed and prosecuted.
“Your own government attacked NABU.”
Concede it: yes, in July 2025. Then give the outcome: the law was reversed within days after public protests.
“So your benchmark is Russia?”
Use Russia to contrast systems, not scores: in Russia the watchdogs are in exile, in Ukraine they criticise the government openly.
“The reform has passed.”
Only say it if you have checked. As of June 2026 the bill on automatic case closure was registered, not adopted.
“The officials are the problem.”
Setting society against the state invites the reply “So why fund your government?” Frame it as checks and balances.
A caveat: whose perception?
Russia invests in convincing Ukrainians that their own state is hopelessly corrupt, because a society that believes nothing can change stops demanding change.
One documented example
In February 2021, the National Security and Defence Council sanctioned the TV channels 112 Ukraine, NewsOne and ZIK, associated with Viktor Medvedchuk and widely described as spreading Russian propaganda narratives. Be aware that the sanctions were criticised on rule-of-law grounds because they bypassed the courts.
Keep it in proportion
The index is built from expert and business assessments, not public opinion, so domestic perception affects it only indirectly. This is context for understanding the climate, not an argument for a debate with a Western partner.
The infrastructure that carries the narrative
The map shows three layers: Russian cooperation agreements with foreign media outlets, Russian journalism training programmes, and Russia House cultural centres.
ISW describes a Kremlin effort to train foreign journalists and young media professionals, through programmes such as SputnikPro and RT Academy, increasingly with AI in the curriculum.
The map does not track the corruption myth as such. It shows the channels through which Kremlin narratives, this one included, reach audiences far from Russia.
Role play: how it works
Rooms of three: a speaker, a Western partner and an observer. You keep the same room and rotate roles, so everyone takes the speaker's seat once.
| Round 1 | Round 2 | Round 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Person A | Speaker | Partner | Observer |
| Person B | Partner | Observer | Speaker |
| Person C | Observer | Speaker | Partner |
Before you go
Open the role card file from the chat. Your room has three role cards, one per round.
Western partner
Read your card and its follow-up questions privately. The speaker knows who you are, but not what you will ask next.
Observer
Use the checklist, keep time, and write down one line worth keeping.
Four types of communicator
The MP
Decides on funding
Sympathetic but accountable to voters. Wants guarantees that support will not be wasted, and something to say in the next budget debate.
The taxpayer
Asks where the money goes
Not hostile, but tired of the war in the news and worried about prices at home. Responds to plain language and concrete safeguards.
The journalist
Looks for contradictions
Well briefed and persistent. Will test every claim, ask follow-up questions and quote you back to yourself.
The blogger
Reduces the issue to a headline
Needs a sharp take for an audience that scrolls. Interrupts, simplifies and rewards the shortest, clearest answer.
Round timer
Exchange
Round 1 of 3
4:00
Use this to keep time while you visit the rooms, and send the cues with “Broadcast message to all”.
Observer checklist
- Did the speaker acknowledge the real problem before reframing?
- Did they challenge the premise or the conclusion, and not only the facts?
- Was every fact accurate, and could they name the source?
- Did they adapt the argument to this partner?
- Did they stay calm and avoid sounding defensive?
- Which one line is worth keeping for the message box?
Back to the opening question
Isn't Ukraine the most corrupt country in Europe?
Each room shares one answer that worked. Then rewrite your first answer in the chat, and compare it with what you wrote at 18:00.
Our message box
Sources
- Transparency International. CPI 2025: Ukraine
- Transparency International Ukraine. CPI 2025 in Ukraine and the world
- Transparency International Ukraine. Corruption Perceptions Index 2025
- Transparency International Ukraine. How to change perceptions of “Ukrainian corruption” (February 2026)
- NACP. Ukraine has improved its score in the CPI 2025
- Transparency International. CPI 2025: Eastern Europe and Central Asia
- Transparency International Anticorruption Center (Armenia). CPI 2025 regional scores
- Transparency International Russia. CPI 2025: Russia matches its worst-ever score
- Human Rights Watch. New law undercuts independence of anti-corruption bodies (July 2025)
- Ukrinform. Verkhovna Rada passes law restoring NABU and SAP independence (July 2025)
- Laboratory of Legislative Initiatives. NABU saved but prosecution not (August 2025)
- European Commission. The Ukraine Facility
- Council of the EU. Ukraine Facility implementation document (2025)
- Council of the EU. EU and Ukraine open first accession negotiations cluster (June 2026)
- NACP. Negotiations launched on the Fundamentals cluster (June 2026)
- Interfax-Ukraine. Bill No. 15333 on CPC amendments registered (June 2026)
- OSW. Ukraine: pro-Russian TV channels closed down (February 2021)
- Ukrainian News. Rule-of-law criticism of the 2021 channel sanctions
Thank you
The sWORD Discussion Lab meets on the last Thursday of every month.
All session materials: the sWORD library
Support the Lab
The Lab runs on voluntary contributions. Scan the code with your phone camera or the Privat24 app to make one.
BY
© 2026 KP English Language Centre · Kateryna Pokotylo · Holka / The Needle. All rights reserved. Unauthorised reproduction or use in commercial training is prohibited.