Western Anticorruption Policy in Ukraine: Success or Failure?

几周前,我遇到了一个有趣的观点,与西方支持的促进乌克兰反腐改革的努力的影响相对应。On one side we have an online piece in外交事务通过Adrian Karatnycky(the Managing Partner of a咨询公司这“与寻求进入乌克兰和东欧复杂但利润丰厚的新兴市场的投资者和公司合作”)和亚力山大莫蒂尔(Professor of Political Science at Rutgers University) entitled,"How Western Anticorruption Policy Is Failing Ukraine."另一方面,我们在大西洋理事会的博客上看到了达里亚·卡列尼克的回应。基辅反腐败行动中心)题为"Actually,西方的反腐败政策已经到位。”我不是乌克兰专家,and so I'm reluctant to take a strong position on which side has the better of the argument,but I found the debate interesting not only for its implications for Ukraine,but also because it raises a couple of more general issues that come up in many other contexts,issues that anticorruption advocates should pay attention to even if they have no particular interest in Ukraine.Those issues are,第一,一个信息传递的问题,我称之为“杯子半满/杯子半空”的问题,第二,使个人不法分子对腐败行为承担个人(和刑事)责任的相对重要性。

Let me first try to give a flavor of the debate,然后对这两个问题都说一点。188bet app

先生。Karatnycky and Professor Motyl start out by acknowledging that so far Western donors' efforts to pressure Ukraine to undertake significant anticorruption reforms have yielded substantial progress,including major and successful reforms to the gas pricing system,the tax system,公共采购,银行业,国有企业管理,and other areas.他们写道:“通过任何客观的衡量变化的方法,“乌克兰为减少腐败所做的努力”—这,the authors note,resulted largely from Western pressure—"have achieved more positive change in the last four years than in the two decades preceding them."

有什么问题吗?为什么,如果西方支持的改革努力“每年为国家节省高达60亿美元的损失”,那么Karatnycky和Motyl并没有获得他们的头衔,"How Western Anticorruption Policy is Succeeding in Ukraine"?他们给出了两个相关的答案:

  • First,Karatnycky和Motyl抱怨西方政策制定者拒绝承认乌克兰的改革多么成功,这样做有助于乌克兰公众普遍感到悲观和沮丧,这种沮丧可能会削弱对波罗申科总统无可否认有缺陷的改革派政府的支持,并增加更激进政治因素的吸引力。As they put it,the Western-supported anticorruption campaign in Ukraine is "diminish[ing] public appreciation for the real gains that had been made and dragg[ing] down support for those in power,including Poroshenko." This,反过来,有助于“三个令人担忧的趋势:政治分裂…”民粹主义运动的力量;以及缺乏一个严肃的自由选择。”
  • Second,除了在描述乌克兰迄今为止的反腐败改革努力时滥用了失败的言辞(并促成了这种言辞的滥用),西方政府和捐助者已经,根据Karatnycky和Motyl的说法,over-emphasized personal liability (especially criminal liability) of individual wrongdoers,以体制改革为代价。他们简洁地表达了这一点,"The root cause of the failure of the West's anticorruption effort is … the flawed belief that the key to change was individual politicians and not institutions." A corollary,the authors continue,是“乌克兰的西方反腐败政策正在失败,因为它们专注于建立和授权敌对结构,而不是与国家建立合作关系。”因此,Karatnycky和Motyl总结道,Western governments and donors interested in advancing the cause of anticorruption in Ukraine should pivot away from a focus on institutions meant to hold individual high-level politicians criminally liable for corruption,相反,应通过广泛的私有化,推动“缩小寻租和其他腐败计划的范围”,取消垄断,以及建立独立的监管机构。To the extent that the West focuses on law enforcement institutions,Karatnycky和Motyl声称,重点应该放在内部能力建设和加强对执法机构本身的监控上。

Ms.Kaleniuk will have none of it.她同意,西方支持的反腐倡廉改革取得了重大成果,并强调“这些改革可能只是因为国际货币基金组织,EU,其他外国合作伙伴也要求这样做。虽然Karatnycky和Motyl认为,最近的重点是建立更有效的执法机构,如国家反腐败局(NABU)。反腐败专门检察官办公室,国家预防腐败局,188bet app尚未成立的特别反腐败法庭是一个错误,Ms.卡伦纽克主张,乌克兰的反腐败改革“只能是可持续的,不可逆转的如果有一个运作良好的惩罚性机制,那么这是有效的,“在这方面,西方需要更努力地挖掘和推动。”特别是,虽然Karatnycky和Motyl认为,NABU和特别检察官办公室的工作效率并不高,Ms.Kaleniuk指出,事实上,他们在调查和起诉甚至是高级别官员方面的记录都很好,但由于这些案件的无效性,案件的创办人,低效的,可能还有腐败的司法系统。鉴于此,乌克兰公众的沮丧和愤世嫉俗是可以理解的:正如她所说。Kaleniuk说,“由于[反腐败和透明度改革],millions of Ukrainians know which senior officials steak from the state and how,但他们不明白为什么没有人在监狱里。当然,这导致了对国家的巨大挫折和深深的不信任。”

Because she thinks that judicial reform is the key to addressing this problem,Ms.卡列尼乌克的大部分作品都强调了特别反腐败法庭的必要性,外国参与司法选择。But while this is an interesting and important issue (one we've touched on in prior blog posts—see在这里在这里,和在这里)in the remainder of this post I want to consider the two more general issues I flagged at the beginning: first,在一个地方性腐败的国家,反腐败改革者(在乌克兰或更普遍地说)强调努力使个别高级别的不法分子承担责任是否明智;and,第二,如何围绕反腐倡廉改革努力构建信息框架,应该把重点放在已经取得的进展上,还有,应该多重视仍然存在的问题。

  • 在个人责任问题上,我承认,尽管我必须包括我对乌克兰了解不多的警告,188bet appI found Ms.卡列尼克的论点更有说服力。我不认为有人会反对卡拉特尼基和莫蒂尔的观点,即减少腐败机会的结构性体制改革是必要的(尽管有些人可能会对他们的一些规定提出异议,such as mass privatization).但是,这种制度改革不需要使用“大棒”就可以取得成功的说法——这是一种真正的威胁,违法会导致严重的惩罚,我觉得这与证据不符。那些在控制腐败方面做得相当好的国家通常并不依赖只有在有效调查的基础上,起诉,和惩罚,但这肯定是配方的一部分。I can't think of any countries that have made significant progress against corruption without establishing effective mechanisms to hold wrongdoers,包括有权势的人,负有责任的。(当然,in some countries—China springs to mind—the most senior leaders may not be subjected to any real legal accountability,但这与说那些能够打倒个别高级别政治家的机构并不重要的说法不同。)此外,while Karatnycky and Motyl assert that "systemic reform is always a complex process highly dependent on changing structural relationships and institutional practices and not on changing the personalities that head them," it's not clear that this assertion—at least the last clause—is actually true,尽管措辞极其复杂。当然,对“结构关系和制度实践”的改变很重要,但也有相当多的证据表明,个人领导人可以做出巨大的改变。事实上,相当一部分(当然不是全部)成功(或至少有希望)反腐改革的主要例子高度依赖于个别领导人:新加坡的李光耀认为,Mikheil Saakashvili在乔治亚州,中国的习近平,John Magufuli in Tanzania,以及其他。但这实际上是一个侧重点:那些,像女士一样。Kaleniuk世卫组织强调需要有效的法律机制来追究个人的责任,但这并不是主要因为他们认为,仅仅撤换少数官员将产生影响,but rather because eliminating the culture of impunity will systematically change officials' incentives.否则,制度改革,包括那些卡拉特尼基和莫蒂尔倡导的路线,很可能是自己腐败。在这一点上,我不得不说这让我觉得很困惑——我想说的是,我不喜欢,尽管我不愿意在这一点上与(被指控的)区域专家敲响号角,在缺乏有效机制的情况下提倡大规模私有化,以惩罚有权势的政府官员和从事高层腐败行为的关系密切的私人行动者。在我看来,前苏联,特别是俄罗斯的许多经验,是一本教科书,说明了国家资源私有化是如何进行的,当与不受惩罚的文化结合在一起时,高级官员及其亲信是一种灾难的秘诀.Now,I don't know enough to have a strong view on whether the specific reforms being pushed by Western governments or Ukrainian NGOs—such as the specialized anticorruption court—are good ideas or not.但我想说的重点是,which has relevance beyond the Ukraine debate,虽然有时强调(正确的)一点很流行,但只关注个人责任,没有伴随体制改革,不足以在反腐败斗争中取得真正的进展,we shouldn't forget that the reverse is also true: trying to reform institutions without tackling the culture of impunity is unlikely to produce lasting change.
  • Now,至于信息问题,here I think there's a genuine,乌克兰辩论中根深蒂固的问题,但我认为在这方面工作的人还不够充分。这就是我认为的问题:反腐败斗争是一个漫长而缓慢的过程,对于大多数国家,即使是事实上取得重大进展的国家,the problem usually remains daunting.Emphasizing the progress that has been made in the fight against corruption—what I'll call the "glass half full" message—can help undermine the fatalistic narrative that corruption is intractable,thereby inspiring people to have more confidence that change is possible;it may also increase the incentives for governments to undertake serious anticorruption reforms—even reforms that might expose corruption in among their own officials and allies—because they believe they'll get political credit for their progress.另一方面,强调问题的严重性,“玻璃半空”的信息可能更有效地让公民关注问题并采取行动。After all,anger and disgust aregreat motivators,probably better than rational calculation.鉴于可能总是有压力将腐败置于其他问题之上,或者只是把它扫到地毯下面,maintaining a certain level of public outrage at how bad the problem is may be necessary to get citizens and media to focus on the issue,which in turn may be necessary to get politicians to do something 188bet appabout it.强调这一问题的范围,也向未来的改革者表明,一半的措施是不够的,即使它们确实产生了一些真正的进步。挑战,恐怕我还没有一个好的答案,反腐倡导者和积极分子是如何,以及有影响力的局外人,can calibrate the message appropriately,为了表示已经取得了重大进展,应当庆祝,but also that the problem remains substantial,such that the government can't rest on its laurels.

One more issue that I'm somewhat reluctant to bring up,但我认为应该注意这一点。先生的生物和…一起出现的Karatnycky外交事务文章只指出他是“大西洋理事会乌克兰在欧洲项目的高级研究员和联合主任”,这不是错的,但是他的日常工作(大概提供了他的大部分收入)是,如上所述,Managing Partner of a consulting firm that helps "investors and corporations seeking entry into … Ukraine and Eastern Europe," and that advertises its "range of relationships in the world of policy,government,and business," as well as Mr.Karatnycky之前与乌克兰“主要政策改革者”的工作关系是主要资产。To be clear,我现在并不想对先生提出任何诽谤。卡拉特尼斯基的正直或对他的诚意提出质疑。188bet app尽管如此,许多读者可能觉得他们应该知道,when reading a piece that advocates measures like privatization and de-monopolization–measures that would open up many more opportunities for foreign investors–that one of the co-authors (or his clients) might stand to realize substantial financial benefits from such policies.有些读者可能也觉得,如果一篇文章指出,把重点放在某些政府官员的个人责任上是一个政策错误,而这篇文章是由一位在商业环境中,advertises his close personal relationships with those same officials.再一次,这有点微妙,因为我没有理由相信外交事务这篇文章代表的不是先生。Karatnycky作为乌克兰问题专家的观点(尽管值得注意的是,Karatnycky has been criticized in the past for his所谓的安逸倾向任何一个在乌克兰当政的人)。很可能是外交事务,而不是先生。Karatnycky本人,决定先生的哪一部分。卡拉特尼斯基的长而令人印象深刻的简历,列在他的作品的副线。但我认为当商人,especially consultants who trade on their personal relationships with government and business elites,对他们工作的国家的政治事务进行评论,they should be identified by their primary (business) job,不是因为智囊团的关系或者他们可能拥有的其他头衔——特别是当话题是腐败的时候。和先生。Karatnycky has been以前在这个问题上呼吁,making it even more important to take extra steps to avoid any suggestion,无论是误导还是不公平,试图对他潜在的相关商业利益不直截了当。188bet app

(以免我在这一点上被指责虚伪,我应该提到的是,2017年3月,我被美国国际开发署的一个承包商雇佣到基辅旅行三天,主要是介绍我共同撰写的一份关于专门反腐败法庭的报告的调查结果,我得到了一笔不多的咨询费。我在乌克兰没有持续的金融或商业利益,或对该国未来合同工作的任何期望。)

关于“2”的思考Western Anticorruption Policy in Ukraine: Success or Failure?

  1. 马修的问题不完全是黑白的。是的,阿德里安倾向于表达乌克兰侨民对乌克兰政府的看法,不管是什么,是的,西方在支持反腐败方面一直是极好的。然而,问题是,你能在多大程度上攻击政府,并与他们合作完成事情?对一个在4年内进行改革的政府的持续反对,是否是实现更多改革的有效途径?These are valid points and I see validity in both Mr.Karatnycky position as I do with Ms Kaleniuk's defense.作为一个每天(大多数是每小时)关注乌克兰反腐败事件的人,我看到了一个令人担忧的趋势,即只有一个叙述被表达,当然,社交媒体上对卡拉特尼基的人身攻击,因为他敢于表达不同的观点,这是值得关注的。我现在所看到的是民间社会的授权,但在某些问题上,对对话几乎没有责任感或兴趣。基辅的许多其他政治观察家也有同样的担忧,他们目前基本上保持沉默。

    • 我认为我不同意你的意见。我完全同意消息传递的问题——强调已经取得的进展与如何强调仍然存在的问题是一个非常困难的挑战,因为我在文章的第二个要点中列出的原因(这似乎与你在评论中提出的观点大体一致)。

      As for the issues related to Mr.Karatnycky具体地说:我当然不打算我的倒数第二段是“个人攻击”他“敢于表达不同的观点”,and I hope it did not come off that way.我竭力强调我没有理由怀疑他的诚意。但我坚持我的主张,当他或任何其他具有类似商业利益的人对此类问题发表评论时,清楚地披露商业利益是很重要的。这当然并不意味着他的观点应该被忽视;许多在政策问题上拥有个人经济利益的人在这方面也有大量的专业知识,and their views are not necessarily distorted by their material interests.But such interests do seem like the sort of thing that interested readers ought to know 188bet appabout,所以应该披露。不这样做不仅是误导,但这可能会给这场运动增加个人攻击的动力。

      In any event,I left that point to the end precisely because I wanted to keep the focus of my criticisms of his position on the substance — especially my disagreement with the claim that pursuing "institutional reform" in the absence of individual accountability would be sufficient.

留下答复

在下面填写您的详细信息或单击图标登录:

wordpress.com徽标

您正在使用您的wordpress.com帐户进行评论。Log Out/Change

谷歌照片

您正在使用您的Google帐户进行评论。Log Out/Change

Twitter picture

您正在使用您的Twitter帐户发表评论。Log Out/Change

Facebook photo

您正在使用Facebook帐户发表评论。Log Out/Change

正在连接到%s

此网站使用Akismet来减少垃圾邮件。Learn how your comment data is processed.